I have absolutely no problem with this. Provided that everybody drinking the raw milk has full insurance coverage, of course. Otherwise, they should change the law to state that the EMTALA regs don't count for anyone who drinks raw milk and shows up uninsured at a healthcare facility suffering from Campylobacter, e Coli, Salmonella, Shigella, Yersinia, Norovirus, Brucella, or Listeria. Free treatment should be a barf bag and a porta-potti, and an educational flyer on why raw milk actually isn't the miracle drug that kook woo-science sites like Natural News make it out to be.

dahmers love zombie:I have absolutely no problem with this. Provided that everybody drinking the raw milk has full insurance coverage, of course. Otherwise, they should change the law to state that the EMTALA regs don't count for anyone who drinks raw milk and shows up uninsured at a healthcare facility suffering from Campylobacter, e Coli, Salmonella, Shigella, Yersinia, Norovirus, Brucella, or Listeria. Free treatment should be a barf bag and a porta-potti, and an educational flyer on why raw milk actually isn't the miracle drug that kook woo-science sites like Natural News make it out to be.

Unless it is a kid getting sick, then treat the kid and call child services on the parents

dahmers love zombie:I have absolutely no problem with this. Provided that everybody drinking the raw milk has full insurance coverage, of course. Otherwise, they should change the law to state that the EMTALA regs don't count for anyone who drinks raw milk and shows up uninsured at a healthcare facility suffering from Campylobacter, e Coli, Salmonella, Shigella, Yersinia, Norovirus, Brucella, or Listeria. Free treatment should be a barf bag and a porta-potti, and an educational flyer on why raw milk actually isn't the miracle drug that kook woo-science sites like Natural News make it out to be.

Same thing for folks that ride motorcycles without helmets so they can feel the wind in their hair and asphalt on their basal ganglia.

"Thank you Jesus, we don't have to drive toanother state and bootleg raw milk anymore," wrote one commenter on a recent announcement posted at A Campaign for Real Milk, a project of The Weston A. Price Foundation (WAPF). "This is a great day in Arkansas!"

Yes, the power of Christ compels you to dismiss more than a century of understanding of germ theory, and the reason pasteurization was invented, because of something you read on a website sidebar.

Subby, I see nothing here that has anything to download with the FEDERAL government. Are you just that excited about posting stories that you think are Anti-Obama that you don't even read them first to make sure?

notto:"Natural News" would praise the government or state outlawing GMO. That is one of the many hypocrisies and reasoning fallacies they exhibit in their anti-scientific fanaticism.

I ran into a formerly bright 20-year-old girl a couple of weeks ago at a little tea shop in my neighborhood, ranting about gluten. I hadn't seen her in a year or so, and she'd fallen in with the anti-science crowd through her church in that year.

She explained that gluten is bad for everyone, because it's genetically modified gluten! Gluten causes autism and prevents you from absorbing natural nutrients!

I pointed out that there is no current crop of genetically modified wheat on the market, that wheat was one of the first agricultural products, and that very few people have any problem ingesting gluten. She picked up her iPad and went to Natural News to bolster her points.

I chortled at Natural News. She said, "YOU'D BETTER WATCH IT! I'm studying to be a Naturopath!"

Lenny_da_Hog:notto: "Natural News" would praise the government or state outlawing GMO. That is one of the many hypocrisies and reasoning fallacies they exhibit in their anti-scientific fanaticism.

I ran into a formerly bright 20-year-old girl a couple of weeks ago at a little tea shop in my neighborhood, ranting about gluten. I hadn't seen her in a year or so, and she'd fallen in with the anti-science crowd through her church in that year.

She explained that gluten is bad for everyone, because it's genetically modified gluten! Gluten causes autism and prevents you from absorbing natural nutrients!

I pointed out that there is no current crop of genetically modified wheat on the market, that wheat was one of the first agricultural products, and that very few people have any problem ingesting gluten. She picked up her iPad and went to Natural News to bolster her points.

I chortled at Natural News. She said, "YOU'D BETTER WATCH IT! I'm studying to be a Naturopath!"

I told her she'd better get used to the ridicule.

I had somebody in my General Chem II class last year that was studying to be a Naturopath. After seeing her understanding of even basic concepts, I'm even more convinced that science isn't their strong point.

buzzcut73:Lenny_da_Hog: notto: "Natural News" would praise the government or state outlawing GMO. That is one of the many hypocrisies and reasoning fallacies they exhibit in their anti-scientific fanaticism.

I ran into a formerly bright 20-year-old girl a couple of weeks ago at a little tea shop in my neighborhood, ranting about gluten. I hadn't seen her in a year or so, and she'd fallen in with the anti-science crowd through her church in that year.

She explained that gluten is bad for everyone, because it's genetically modified gluten! Gluten causes autism and prevents you from absorbing natural nutrients!

I pointed out that there is no current crop of genetically modified wheat on the market, that wheat was one of the first agricultural products, and that very few people have any problem ingesting gluten. She picked up her iPad and went to Natural News to bolster her points.

I chortled at Natural News. She said, "YOU'D BETTER WATCH IT! I'm studying to be a Naturopath!"

I told her she'd better get used to the ridicule.

I had somebody in my General Chem II class last year that was studying to be a Naturopath. After seeing her understanding of even basic concepts, I'm even more convinced that science isn't their strong point.

I'm all about natural health remedies. Preferably after their active components have been isolated and their therapeutic effectiveness verified in double-blind clinical testing.

buzzcut73:Lenny_da_Hog: notto: "Natural News" would praise the government or state outlawing GMO. That is one of the many hypocrisies and reasoning fallacies they exhibit in their anti-scientific fanaticism.

I ran into a formerly bright 20-year-old girl a couple of weeks ago at a little tea shop in my neighborhood, ranting about gluten. I hadn't seen her in a year or so, and she'd fallen in with the anti-science crowd through her church in that year.

She explained that gluten is bad for everyone, because it's genetically modified gluten! Gluten causes autism and prevents you from absorbing natural nutrients!

I pointed out that there is no current crop of genetically modified wheat on the market, that wheat was one of the first agricultural products, and that very few people have any problem ingesting gluten. She picked up her iPad and went to Natural News to bolster her points.

I chortled at Natural News. She said, "YOU'D BETTER WATCH IT! I'm studying to be a Naturopath!"

I told her she'd better get used to the ridicule.

I had somebody in my General Chem II class last year that was studying to be a Naturopath. After seeing her understanding of even basic concepts, I'm even more convinced that science isn't their strong point.

Lenny_da_Hog:notto: "Natural News" would praise the government or state outlawing GMO. That is one of the many hypocrisies and reasoning fallacies they exhibit in their anti-scientific fanaticism.

I ran into a formerly bright 20-year-old girl a couple of weeks ago at a little tea shop in my neighborhood, ranting about gluten. I hadn't seen her in a year or so, and she'd fallen in with the anti-science crowd through her church in that year.

She explained that gluten is bad for everyone, because it's genetically modified gluten! Gluten causes autism and prevents you from absorbing natural nutrients!

I pointed out that there is no current crop of genetically modified wheat on the market, that wheat was one of the first agricultural products, and that very few people have any problem ingesting gluten. She picked up her iPad and went to Natural News to bolster her points.

I chortled at Natural News. She said, "YOU'D BETTER WATCH IT! I'm studying to be a Naturopath!"

I told her she'd better get used to the ridicule.

I knew a guy who had an actual gluten allergy. I recall watching him, well just hearing actually, vomit violently after eating an orzo dish that he thought was rice. This was over a decade ago so well before the anti-gluten bs started.

Glutten allergies do exist but are not as common as people who claim to have them. If glutten was bad for us surely there would be some evidence in the 10,000+ year history of human agriculture.

qorkfiend:buzzcut73: Lenny_da_Hog: notto: "Natural News" would praise the government or state outlawing GMO. That is one of the many hypocrisies and reasoning fallacies they exhibit in their anti-scientific fanaticism.

I ran into a formerly bright 20-year-old girl a couple of weeks ago at a little tea shop in my neighborhood, ranting about gluten. I hadn't seen her in a year or so, and she'd fallen in with the anti-science crowd through her church in that year.

She explained that gluten is bad for everyone, because it's genetically modified gluten! Gluten causes autism and prevents you from absorbing natural nutrients!

I pointed out that there is no current crop of genetically modified wheat on the market, that wheat was one of the first agricultural products, and that very few people have any problem ingesting gluten. She picked up her iPad and went to Natural News to bolster her points.

I chortled at Natural News. She said, "YOU'D BETTER WATCH IT! I'm studying to be a Naturopath!"

I told her she'd better get used to the ridicule.

I had somebody in my General Chem II class last year that was studying to be a Naturopath. After seeing her understanding of even basic concepts, I'm even more convinced that science isn't their strong point.

Blew up at my sister because she had given her three-year-old daughter raw goat's milk. Got a headful of hurr durr natural in response. Told her that it doesn't get much more natural than e.coli. No response.

She recently declared that she'd read that baking soda cures cancer and big pharma is suppressing that knowledge. She's a lost cause, but I despair of the fact that her kid will be subjected to this nonsense.

From Wiki - Naturopathy, ornaturopathic medicine, is a form of based on a belief in, which posits that a special energy called vital energy or vital force guides bodily processes such as, reproduction, growth, and adaptation. Naturopathy favors a approach with non-invasive treatment and generally avoids the use of and. Among naturopaths, complete rejection of biomedicine and modern science is common.

qorkfiend:buzzcut73: Lenny_da_Hog: notto: "Natural News" would praise the government or state outlawing GMO. That is one of the many hypocrisies and reasoning fallacies they exhibit in their anti-scientific fanaticism.

I ran into a formerly bright 20-year-old girl a couple of weeks ago at a little tea shop in my neighborhood, ranting about gluten. I hadn't seen her in a year or so, and she'd fallen in with the anti-science crowd through her church in that year.

She explained that gluten is bad for everyone, because it's genetically modified gluten! Gluten causes autism and prevents you from absorbing natural nutrients!

I pointed out that there is no current crop of genetically modified wheat on the market, that wheat was one of the first agricultural products, and that very few people have any problem ingesting gluten. She picked up her iPad and went to Natural News to bolster her points.

I chortled at Natural News. She said, "YOU'D BETTER WATCH IT! I'm studying to be a Naturopath!"

I told her she'd better get used to the ridicule.

I had somebody in my General Chem II class last year that was studying to be a Naturopath. After seeing her understanding of even basic concepts, I'm even more convinced that science isn't their strong point.

Naturopathy, or naturopathic medicine, is a form of alternative medicine based on a belief in vitalism, which posits that a special energy called vital energy or vital force guides bodily processes such as metabolism, reproduction, growth, and adaptation.[1] Naturopathy favors a holistic approach with non-invasive treatment and generally avoids the use of surgery and drugs.[2] Among naturopaths, complete rejection of biomedicine and modern science is common.

Vitalism is the doctrine, often advocated in the past but now rejected by mainstream science,[1] that "living organisms are fundamentally different from non-living entities because they contain some non-physical element or are governed by different principles than are inanimate things".[2] Where vitalism explicitly invokes a vital principle, that element is often referred to as the "vital spark", "energy" or "élan vital", which some equate with the soul.

Vitalism has a long history in medical philosophies: most traditional healing practices posited that disease results from some imbalance in vital forces. In the Western tradition founded by Hippocrates, these vital forces were associated with the four temperaments and humours; Eastern traditions posited an imbalance or blocking of qi (or prana).

Albino Squid:Blew up at my sister because she had given her three-year-old daughter raw goat's milk. Got a headful of hurr durr natural in response. Told her that it doesn't get much more natural than e.coli. No response.

She recently declared that she'd read that baking soda cures cancer and big pharma is suppressing that knowledge. She's a lost cause, but I despair of the fact that her kid will be subjected to this nonsense.

Maturin:dahmers love zombie: I have absolutely no problem with this. Provided that everybody drinking the raw milk has full insurance coverage, of course. Otherwise, they should change the law to state that the EMTALA regs don't count for anyone who drinks raw milk and shows up uninsured at a healthcare facility suffering from Campylobacter, e Coli, Salmonella, Shigella, Yersinia, Norovirus, Brucella, or Listeria. Free treatment should be a barf bag and a porta-potti, and an educational flyer on why raw milk actually isn't the miracle drug that kook woo-science sites like Natural News make it out to be.

Same thing for folks that ride motorcycles without helmets so they can feel the wind in their hair and asphalt on their basal ganglia.

Yes, they pay motorcycle insurance - and in MI anyway they pay extra for their helmetless stupidity.

qorkfiend:Albino Squid: Blew up at my sister because she had given her three-year-old daughter raw goat's milk. Got a headful of hurr durr natural in response. Told her that it doesn't get much more natural than e.coli. No response.

She recently declared that she'd read that baking soda cures cancer and big pharma is suppressing that knowledge. She's a lost cause, but I despair of the fact that her kid will be subjected to this nonsense.

What makes people go this crazy?

Probably the after effect of some avoidable childhood disease they had.

qorkfiend:Albino Squid: Blew up at my sister because she had given her three-year-old daughter raw goat's milk. Got a headful of hurr durr natural in response. Told her that it doesn't get much more natural than e.coli. No response.

She recently declared that she'd read that baking soda cures cancer and big pharma is suppressing that knowledge. She's a lost cause, but I despair of the fact that her kid will be subjected to this nonsense.

What makes people go this crazy?

It makes life understandable and requires very little thought.

I would say 'eh let them have their fantasy world' but it always spills over on to the kids or community in some way.

qorkfiend:Albino Squid: Blew up at my sister because she had given her three-year-old daughter raw goat's milk. Got a headful of hurr durr natural in response. Told her that it doesn't get much more natural than e.coli. No response.

She recently declared that she'd read that baking soda cures cancer and big pharma is suppressing that knowledge. She's a lost cause, but I despair of the fact that her kid will be subjected to this nonsense.

What makes people go this crazy?

In my sister's case, it's the fact that she's stubborn and it fits her worldview. And because she's stubborn, linking her to things that disprove the nonsense that she reads on sites like Natural News only causes her to dig in her heels.

max_pooper:Glutten allergies do exist but are not as common as people who claim to have them. If glutten was bad for us surely there would be some evidence in the 10,000+ year history of human agriculture.

Celiac disease is genetically caused and affects about 1% of the US population. Another 4% or so now self-report an undiagnosable "gluten intolerance."

In a recent marketing poll, 30% of Americans say they're trying to cut down or eliminate gluten from their diets. Thanks to marketers, they're now convinced it's like cholesterol, something that does cumulative damage over time.

qorkfiend:buzzcut73: Lenny_da_Hog: notto: "Natural News" would praise the government or state outlawing GMO. That is one of the many hypocrisies and reasoning fallacies they exhibit in their anti-scientific fanaticism.

I ran into a formerly bright 20-year-old girl a couple of weeks ago at a little tea shop in my neighborhood, ranting about gluten. I hadn't seen her in a year or so, and she'd fallen in with the anti-science crowd through her church in that year.

She explained that gluten is bad for everyone, because it's genetically modified gluten! Gluten causes autism and prevents you from absorbing natural nutrients!

I pointed out that there is no current crop of genetically modified wheat on the market, that wheat was one of the first agricultural products, and that very few people have any problem ingesting gluten. She picked up her iPad and went to Natural News to bolster her points.

I chortled at Natural News. She said, "YOU'D BETTER WATCH IT! I'm studying to be a Naturopath!"

I told her she'd better get used to the ridicule.

I had somebody in my General Chem II class last year that was studying to be a Naturopath. After seeing her understanding of even basic concepts, I'm even more convinced that science isn't their strong point.

dahmers love zombie:I have absolutely no problem with this. Provided that everybody drinking the raw milk has full insurance coverage, of course. Otherwise, they should change the law to state that the EMTALA regs don't count for anyone who drinks raw milk and shows up uninsured at a healthcare facility suffering from Campylobacter, e Coli, Salmonella, Shigella, Yersinia, Norovirus, Brucella, or Listeria. Free treatment should be a barf bag and a porta-potti, and an educational flyer on why raw milk actually isn't the miracle drug that kook woo-science sites like Natural News make it out to be.

Would it surprise you to learn that more people have gotten sick from pasteurized milk on a per serving basis than from raw milk?

I used to get a cold or flu bout about 3-4 times a year and I thought that was normal. In my 50s I discovered and started drinking raw milk and for 5 years now and since then I have had one fever and never a single upper respiratory infection. I cannot attribute that to raw milk because the science hasn't been done, and in my case there are a lot of unexplained variables that would have to be examined, but I do know thousands of people report the same sort of experience. I have to conclude from personal experience the benefits of raw milk are real.

And in comparison the factory milk you think is safe tastes like total crap. People think it is good because they don't know any better.

For an analysis of the comparative safety of raw versus pasteurized milk see Those Pathogens, What You Should Know by Dr. Ted Beals. On a per-serving basis, raw milk is as safe or several times safer than pasteurized milk. See our press release on these findings, Government Data Proves Raw Milk Safe, and this Safety of Raw Milk Summary PowerPoint Presentation.

The key figure that permits a calculation of raw milk illnesses on a per-person basis comes from a 2007 Centers for Disease Control (CDC) FoodNet survey, which found that 3.04 percent of the population consumes raw milk, or about 9.4 million people, based on the 2010 census. This number may in fact be larger in 2011 as raw milk is growing in popularity. For example, sales of raw milk increased 25 percent in California in 2010, while sales of pasteurized milk declined 3 percent.

In addition, Dr. Beals has compiled published reports of illness attributed to raw milk from 1999 to 2010. During the eleven-year period, illnesses attributed to raw milk averaged 42 per year.

That's an incredibly shiatty way to gather data. It can't be called a useful study by any means.

AntiNerd:dahmers love zombie: I have absolutely no problem with this. Provided that everybody drinking the raw milk has full insurance coverage, of course. Otherwise, they should change the law to state that the EMTALA regs don't count for anyone who drinks raw milk and shows up uninsured at a healthcare facility suffering from Campylobacter, e Coli, Salmonella, Shigella, Yersinia, Norovirus, Brucella, or Listeria. Free treatment should be a barf bag and a porta-potti, and an educational flyer on why raw milk actually isn't the miracle drug that kook woo-science sites like Natural News make it out to be.

Would it surprise you to learn that more people have gotten sick from pasteurized milk on a per serving basis than from raw milk?

I used to get a cold or flu bout about 3-4 times a year and I thought that was normal. In my 50s I discovered and started drinking raw milk and for 5 years now and since then I have had one fever and never a single upper respiratory infection. I cannot attribute that to raw milk because the science hasn't been done, and in my case there are a lot of unexplained variables that would have to be examined, but I do know thousands of people report the same sort of experience. I have to conclude from personal experience the benefits of raw milk are real.

And in comparison the factory milk you think is safe tastes like total crap. People think it is good because they don't know any better.

Citation:

For an analysis of the comparative safety of raw versus pasteurized milk see Those Pathogens, What You Should Know by Dr. Ted Beals. On a per-serving basis, raw milk is as safe or several times safer than pasteurized milk. See our press release on these findings, Government Data Proves Raw Milk Safe, and this Safety of Raw Milk Summary PowerPoint Presentation.

AntiNerd:In my 50s I discovered and started drinking raw milk and for 5 years now and since then I have had one fever and never a single upper respiratory infection. I cannot attribute that to raw milk because the science hasn't been done, and in my case there are a lot of unexplained variables that would have to be examined, but I do know thousands of people report the same sort of experience.

You claim you can't, but you sure as shiat did.

And can I just say I am floored that you provided a citation that does nothing more than tell us to go read a book.

AntiNerd:Would it surprise you to learn that more people have gotten sick from pasteurized milk on a per serving basis than from raw milk?

Perhaps I went through too fast, but at no point is this claim shown in your links.

As for reported illness comparisons, I'll pass on assuming the raw milk weirdos do not also overlap their distrust of medical science by skipping the doctor and treating themselves all sorts of ridiculous crap. You guys sound like anti-vaxxers.

stuhayes2010:I grew up drinking raw milk straight from our goats. I never got sick or died from it.

They've been drinking raw milk in France for a long, long, time, both from cows and goats, and it doesn't seem to be causing mass disease outbreaks. They're also big on raw milk cheeses, which are a lot more interesting to me than just raw milk.

I'd love to see the importation restrictions on raw milk cheeses be lifted, or regulations lifted to allow for domestic production.